The agricultural sustainability project that reached over 20.9 million Chinese smallholder farmers struggling with increased populations

Posted on by
Reply
A group effort to improve crop yields and reduce fertilizer use utilized both bottom-up and top-down efforts to be able to successfully reach over 20 million smallholder farmers across China. Smallholder farmers, who control only a few areas of land, are beginning to dominate the agricultural landscape in countries like China, India, and parts of sub-Saharan Africa. By increasing their efficiency and reducing their environmental impacts, they are taking crucial steps to ensure sustainable food sources for the world’s (and their own country’s) growing populations. However, sharing the best practices with smallholder farmers is often a discouraging prospect because the farmers often have limited resources to invest back into their livelihoods and are often grouped in the hundreds of millions in China alone.

Included in a report by the journal Nature, Zhengxia Dou, a professor of agricultural systems in the School of Veterinary Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, teamed up with colleagues from China’s Agricultural University and other organizations in sharing a successful execution of a “long-term, broad-scale intervention that both improved yields and reduced fertilizer application across China.” The first author of the study, Zhenling Cui, along with the project leader and corresponding author, Fusuo Zhang, were both with China’s Agricultural University and assisted Dou. The study’s effort, which was in effect for over 10 years, engaged almost 21 million farmers and increased their yield on average by more than 10% and lowered fertilizer use between 15%-18%. As a whole, these actions created an increase in the farmers’ grain outputs with a decrease in fertilizer inputs, which made savings totaling close to $12.2 billion.

“The extent of the improvement in terms of yield increase and fertilizer decrease was great,” says Dou. “But it was not a surprise as similar results had been attained before. It was the scale of it all, approaching it with an all-out effort and multi-tiered partnerships among scientists, extension agents, agribusinesses, and farmers, achieving a snowball effect. That, to me, is the most impressive takeaway.”

The project began with the overall realization that the current agricultural practices with China’s large number of smallholder farmers didn’t meet the requirements they needed for sustainable productivity. Globally, the production of food has to increase 60%-110% over the 2005 levels by the year 2050 in order to meet this high demand. At this same time, the impacts of climate change and environmental degradation make farming a lot more difficult. In order to determine the best ways to meet the sustainable productivity demand, researchers in the study conducted over 13,000 field trials, which tested what they called “an integrated soil-crop system management program”, or ISSM. ISSM is a model that helps to determine which variety of crops, planting dates and densities, overall fertilizer uses, and other strategies will work best in any given climate and soil type. The tests for this particular model were done using maize, rice, and wheat.

Researchers then organized a massive campaign to work with farmers all across China after finally concluding that the ISSM model could help guide agricultural efforts across major farming zones in China, achieve yield improvements, and increase fertilizer reductions. In order to reach the 20.9 million smallholder farmers in 452 counties in China, this campaign involved more than 1,000 scientists and graduate students, 65,000 agricultural extension agents, and 130,000 agribusiness personnel, which were key partners in the effort by designing fertilizer products that matched the essential needs of the farmers.

“The collaborating scientists trained local technicians, and the technicians worked with the farmers closely to develop their management practices based on what made sense in the region,” Dou says, “This was a massive, nation-wide, multi-layered collaboration.”

To gain a deeper understanding of the current performance of Chinese farmers, the researchers conducted a survey of 8.6 million farmers from about 1,944 counties across the nation. They found a lot of room for improvements, since most had yields of at least 10 % and some as much as 50% lower than the ISSM model would predict. Dou believes the experiences and lessons gained through the nation-wide project can be applicable elsewhere, particularly in Asia. India, for example, is another country where the yields are relatively low and fertilizer use is high. In sub-Saharan Africa, both yield and fertilizer input is low, yet the lessons “inhow to work with smallholder farmers, how to earn their trust and engage with them,” Dou says, would hold true to those of China.

 

References:

http://www.fao.org/ag/save-and-grow/MRW/en/1/index.html

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/03/180309095512.htm

Eating For Pleasure

Posted on by
2

I recently read an article published online by the journal Scientific American titled,

“How Sugar and Fat Trick the Brian into Wanting More Food”

This article was written on January 1st, 2016 by Ferris Jabr

 

In summation, the article discusses how human advancements have resulted in an overabundance and availability of food. This, in turn, has led to overconsumption or the habit of eating for pleasure and no longer for survival. This change in the way we obtain food has resulted in a chemical change in our brains. According to the article, this is referred to, by scientists, as Hedonic Hunger. Simply put, hedonic hunger is what we consider to be “cravings.” A strong urge to eat foods even when we are not hungry. This urge in combination with copious amounts of inexpensive and unhealthy food has led to rising rates of obesity and associated health concerns.

If the body is functioning correctly, when we are low on energy hormones are released to create a feeling of hunger. Once we have consumed enough nutrients a different hormone is released to create a feeling of being full. These hormones alternate throughout the day to ensure energy levels remain balanced. The control center that regulates this release of hormones is the hypothalamus.

It wasn’t until the late 1990s that rodent research led to a new discovery about food and the brain. The hypothalamus was not the only pathway capable of releasing the hungry/full hormones. Scientist calls it “the reward circuit” and it is the same area that lights up in response to gambling or drug use. This part of the brian is “captivated” by foods high in sugar or fat. This is a problem because the reward circuit is POWERFUL. Studies show that our brain’s reward circuit lights up (releasing large amounts of dopamine) simply by viewing or smelling foods that are high in sugar and fat. The release of dopamine consistently over long periods of time can create dopamine resistance in the body that ultimately results in larger amounts of the sweet or fatty food required to achieve the same pleasure high. On the opposide side of this cycle, we find sharp drop-offs and very low lows. The absence of food that activates the reward circuit, in a person who has routinely consumed it,  can result in feelings of depression, anxiety, and desperation. This often results in the person consuming more unhealthy foods in an attempt to maintain their “sense of well-being.”

 

 

This article goes in-depth about the modern relationship that many humans have with food. Now that we no longer have to hunt and gather food to survive we can eat more freely and in much larger amounts than ever before. With so much abundance of food, how do we ensure that we are self-regulating or diets in a way that is healthy but still enjoyable? Much research has been done to answer that question. Today, you can log onto a computer and find resources dedicated to helping you manage your diet through portion control and a balanced diet.

One of my favorite websites for this is choosemyplate.gov

This site has a variety of resources for you to use including a food tracker and lifestyle quizzes.

Let’s be the generation that reverses the trend and lives long, healthy, active lives!

 

The link for the article is here:

 https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-sugar-and-fat-trick-the-brain-into-wanting-more-food/

Texas Flood: Pollution Levels Before and After Hurricane Harvey

Posted on by
4

This article is about a research study done to measure the polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons before and after Hurricane Harvey. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons or PAH’s come about after a large buring of substances and can cause cancer, eye, kidney and liver problems. PAH’s are normally found in an area within Houston called Manchester. Manchester is located near many refineries and industrial sites – where a lot of these pollutants would be given off. Manchester is interesting to this dilemma because it is a predominantly latino neighborhood, and, therefore, face disproportionate health risks due to these hazards.

What the researchers found was that, due to all the major flooding that took place during and after Hurricane Harvey, these pollutants were displaced according to where they would normally be found. Or rather from places of higher concentration before the storm to lower concentration after the storm and vice versa.

This study is important because it represents a somewhat new area of research in the public health field. Due to climate change we are seeing a rise in “super storms” or natural disasters with extra strength. Public health officials want to be better at predicting the impact of these storms so that they can be more efficient when it comes to relief or preparing for these storms.

This news story is relevant to our class because we have discussed environmental justice and disparities as well as climate change, while we will soon discuss pollution and its effects. This is also very relevant to my major being that I am a public health major. This study is rather small and looks a one specific pollutant, but more importantly this new area of disaster preparedness and relief study specifically for superstorms is very important to the field. And eventhough this aritlce does not make any broad assumption it contributes to Houston and their situation which will have to be done for eventually for each community and each type of natural disaster in order to be accuartely prepared.

The authors intended audience is most likely Houston and other Public Health officials in order to inform the citizens and inspire officials for further study. The main researcher in this study was a Professor from Texas A&M, Jennifer Horney. She is an associate professor as well as the head of the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics. Dr. Horney most likely has compassion for her community so she was interested in doing her part by conducting the research. She is also in the Public Health field of epidemiology and maybe noticed a rise in cancer, eye, kidney and liver problems and wanted to trace it to the source of the issue and came across the PAH’s.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/02/180209100733.htm

Personal Change

Posted on by
3

Throughout this semester Environmental and Sustainability Studies has introduced me to the importance of change now. Personally I’ve realized that in order to motivate yourself to be a part of the greater good you must habitually and actively take part in addressing certain issues that you are passionate about. There are many ways to become involved such as citizen science, volunteer work, recycling, buying locally, and educating others on the importance of this issue. For me I have recently tried to change aspects of my lifestyle that have become habitual and are continually a threat to myself and the environment around me.
Upon seeing how many earths I would need to live sustainably I knew that I had to make a change in my lifestyle. Addressing consumption, wastage, and certain activities that have become second nature was the first step. I have recently been trying to go through my day as normal but maintain a sustainability conscious mindset. An example of one of the changes in my routine would be cooking food at home instead of buying out. I would have never realized the significance of this small change in lifestyle. Buying local allows for a strong local economy along with a building of character in local community. The impact is seen not only at the local level but all the way up to the global level. It reduces environmental impact at all levels by requiring less transportation along with less dependence on the big businesses that would otherwise be developing to meet our needs. This results in less congestion, sprawl, habitat loss, and pollution. When all of this is taken into account and a sense of community is created the local businesses take pride in their services and provide for a prosperous outlook for the future of a community. After a couple weeks of maintaining a routine of buying mainly local, recycling, and using a compost in my backyard I feel healthier, have more energy throughout the day, and seen a significant decrease in waste.
At first the urge to buy a burrito from moes southwest grill was hard to resist but after seeing the benefits as opposed to just being momentarily satisfied I have decided to stick with this change in lifestyle. This change has given me a new perspective on the consequences of maintaining oblivious and wasteful routine. If you haven’t already I would consider making this change and seeing the unanticipated yet noticeable benefits. Small changes like eating locally provide for a much brighter and sustainable future which is more important now than ever. Going through the day with this mindset of minimal waste and embracing an environmentally conscious lifestyle contribute to countless amounts of interconnected branches within sustainable development.

 

Scrubbing Carbon from the Atmosphere

Posted on by
1

In the news article I presented in class, I discussed how scientists and engineers are thinking of ways of using technology to directly remove carbon emissions from our atmosphere. Through a multitude of methods both natural and man-made, all collectively known as negative emissions technologies (nets), these technologies show us interesting ways to effectively “scrub” carbon from the atmosphere. Scientists, however, aren’t convinced of the viability of many of these technologies, and that they may cause more environmental harm than good.

The nets listed in the article are direct air capture, enhanced weathering, ocean fertilization, and bioenergy methods like burning plants and planting more forests. Direct air capture involves building machines that specialize in sucking carbon emissions directly from the air. To be an effective method, however, we would need an incredible number of machines produced. Thousands upon thousands. This would not only be extremely costly, but it would take a significant amount of resources to produce that many machines, which makes this method not very viable or sustainable.

Enhanced weathering is the breaking down of certain rocks by naturally combining with the carbon in the air. It’s suggested that we should crush the mineral olivine down to fine sand and spread it across beaches. The issues with this method, however, is that it would require a ton of mining. Constant mining for minerals and the collection of resources needed to grind down the mineral. It simply would not be feasible to mine that many materials and distribute them globally. And again, isn’t a sustainable practice as we are collecting a large amount of nonrenewable materials.

Ocean fertilization involves the sprinkling of iron and other nutrients in the ocean in order to replenish phytoplankton population. Phytoplankton are tiny, microscopic plants that will utilize the carbon as they grow and sink when they die, taking the carbon with them. This method is a bit controversial, since the sprinkling of iron into the ocean is essentially ocean dumping. Also, there isn’t nearly enough research to suggest that this method would at all be effective. One study was conducted at a salmon fishery in Canada, however this study should not be trusted since it was conducted without any scientific oversight and was the source of outrage among scientists. And once again, where do we get the iron? This would be another massive use of resources and would not be sustainable over time.

The last two methods involve terrestrial plants, either burning them to utilize the carbon or through planting more forests. Burning them simply wouldn’t be nearly as effective as even the other methods, because you’d have to burn a lot in order to take out as much carbon as we put in. Personally, I think that planting more trees would actually be the most beneficial of all these methods. You’d be replenishing habitats, provide resources and shelter to the populations in those areas, while also contributing to reducing the carbon load on our atmosphere. However, the world currently cuts down way more forests than we plant, and planting new forests would require a lot of land.

While there is merit in trying to engineer our way out of the climate crisis, there are issues with our approach. The reasons being that, along with all the ones listed above, the economic costs to implement these methods is too high, and it’s just easier and more effective to reduce the amount of carbon being emitted into the atmosphere altogether.

Sources:

  • Fountain, Henry. “Can We Really Scrub Carbon Dioxide From the Atmosphere?” The New York Times, The New York Times, 28 Feb. 2018.
  • Norton, Michael, and Molly Hurley-Depret. “Negative Emission Technologies Will Not Compensate for Inadequate Climate Change Mitigation Efforts, Say European Science Academies.” EASAC Website, EASAC, 1 Feb. 2018, easac.eu/press-releases/details/negative-emission-technologies-will-not-compensate-for-inadequate-climate-change-mitigation-efforts/

Event blog “Floating Island”

Posted on by
3

     Floating Island- Is it Real?

In February 16th, 2018 College of Charleston arranged a very interesting event where a promising science fiction writer, Dr. Melody, gave her speech on floating islands. She is currently an assistant professor at University of California, Santa Barbara. She said that although she was not an architect, she was struck by some pictures of floating islands in an article in “The Guardian,” and later, as a scholar of literature, she did some research on her own. She thought maybe those floating islands can solve the problems some pacific islands are facing due to global warming.

At the beginning of her presentation, she mentioned that several movies such as “Water World, China Mieville, Snow Crash, [and] 20,000 Leagues Under The Sea” were based on the concept of floating lands in post-flood worlds. However, the acceleration of sea level rise now requires the floating island to be taken out of the realm of science fiction. Small island states like Torres Strait Island, the Seychelles, Tuvalu, Micronesia, and the Maldives are considering many options to respond to a post flood future. She showed us a video that actually struck us about how vulnerable those island nations are. In the video clip the president of the Maldives said, “It’s not something in the future, we are facing right now… people were living here for thousands of years but ability sustain human life here seems to be very fragile”. The president Nasid also said, “if we cannot stop the global warming and sea level rising, as the president, it is clear to me that the most important to me to fight for our survival. In the video it showed how flat is the Maldives; there is no hill. The capital Malé has walls around it, but it is still very vulnerable to the rising seas.

Because of the increasing coastal erosion and sea level rising in the near future, perhaps the citizens of these threatened islands will be climate refugees. President Nashid has arranged climate activity forums (COP 21 conferences) and intragovernmental lowland organizations that are now advocating to reduce carbon emission to slow global warming to reduce the speed of this dangerous rise in sea level. If reducing carbon emissions does not work, the people of the Maldives and other island nations will be forced to evacuate to higher lands and become climate refugees. Dr. Melody said that the World Bank has recently come up with a structured migration program suggesting that people of these sinking lowlands can be transferred to the highlands of Austrailia and New Zealand. Some people of the archipelago of Micronesia and Fiji have already invested money to develop the legal framework to assist in climate refugee relocation.

Recently, another option has emerged, large international architecture firms such as Water Studio from the Netherlands and the Sea Studying Institute in Silicon Valley alongside various others in Japan, France, and the rest of the globe have been designing futuristic floating islands that could potentially be sold to the endangered small island nations. Most of these designs are periodically featured in newspaper like in “The Guardian” or the New York Times. These floating island structures could provide new and safer habitation.  In one interview with the President of Kiribati, he said that he has already had meetings with architects who designed some of the spectacles in Dubai with their artificial islands, and he thinks that building floating islands is a potential solution to save their nation, although it is not possible to accommodate every person. Now we can only wait. Perhaps floating islands will not simply remain in the dreams of science fiction writers as scientists and architects are working together to make these islands become real and efficient to save human lives.

 

 

News Report Assignment

Posted on by
1

Unfortunately, I was sick the day I was supposed to present my news report. However, you can view the slide below.

Slideshow Presentation

Basically, this article is about the presence of volatile organic compounds in the Earth’s atmosphere. It is no secret that aerosols and adhesives are harmful to the Earth. That has been known for years. However, recent studies show that they are just as harmful to the Earth as gasoline emissions from our cars are. Unlike gas that is stored in gas tanks and burned over a period of time, hairsprays and other aerosols are sprayed directly into the air. Even more alarming, of all of the raw oil used, only 5% of that goes towards making aerosols, but it is responsible for 25% of air pollution produced by Volatile Organic Compounds. Compare this to the 95% of oils used towards fueling vehicles (which makes up 75% of air pollution from VOCs). This article suggests that we have grossly underestimated the effects of non-vehicle volatile organic compounds.

In addition to the obvious consequences of air pollution, these can also have negative health consequences. Exposure to VOCs can lead to asthma attacks. Additionally, exposure to air pollution is considered the 5th highest risk to human health. This number goes up even more in urban environments.

This combines a lot of what we have learned in class so far. Obviously, it is a form of air pollution. It also is a big part of our ecological footprints. Perhaps in addition to the questions about the foods we consume and the houses we live in, the ecological footprint calculator should also ask us about the deodorant, pesticides, hairsprays, and adhesives we use, since they can all be just as harmful to the environment. Another issue that the author brings up is how to regulate these products. Some people use several of these items that create volatile organic compounds daily, while others cannot stand to be around them. How do we go about determining how much or how little of these products can be used when it does not apply equally to everyone? This also has to do with consumption. How much of these products are produced and sold in mass quantities because of our culture of consumerism?

This article was published by BBC News. This is a reputable British news source. They are very open about their company. On their website, you can find the history of BBC, what they do, their annual reports, and a breakdown of where their funding comes from. Also, they provided information about the original source at the end of the article, which allowed me to easily find the publication in Nature.

 

If you are interested in reading it for yourself you can find the news report here:

 

If you are really interested in this topic, New York Times also reported on it. Read that here:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/16/climate/perfume-pollution-smog.html

 

 

 

 

Consumer Product Analysis- Neutrogena’s Oil-Free Acne Wash Pink Grapefruit Foaming Scrub

Posted on by
2

As consumers, we do not always take into account of how the products that we purchase for our everyday use can be harming the environment. It’s typical for a consumer to focus on what is needed for the current moment, rather than considering the effects of the product in the future. They contain ingredients and other components that consumers are not always aware of, in terms of the complex names listed in the ingredients area on the product. These products can create cycles of unhealthy and harmful effects that not only effect the environment, but a great deal of living organisms.

One of the products that is used in my daily regimen is: Neutrogena’s Oil- Free Acne Wash Pink Grapefruit Foaming Scrub. The purpose of this product is to cleanse one’s face and smooth away roughness without over-drying and irritating the skin. Typically, I use the product 2-3 days out of the week. The product requires the use of water in order for the product to work properly. Although this product can be beneficial to my cosmetic need/wants it contains ingredients and other components that are harmful to the environment. The first active ingredient listed on the product is Salicylic acid, which serves as the acne treatment. Some of the inactive ingredients include: Water, Glycerin, Cocamidopropyl Betaine, Polyethylene, and the list continues. I, personally, am unaware of more than half of the ingredients that this product contains! I am certain that the majority of consumers are not aware of the ingredients and other components that are used in the products that they purchase.

Neutrogena is a brand of the Johnson & Johnson Family of Consumer Companies and manufactures and markets their products in over 70 countries. I am unsure about the exact process that takes place to manufacture this certain product, however most facial washes and scrubs are mass-produced in a factory with the help of machines. The products are then packaged in large quantities and shipped out. The factories require a lot of energy, like power, in order to produce these products in large quantities. There are multiple machines in the facility that are operating at once, so you can imagine the amount of power needed to keep them functioning.

The main concern with the product that I chose do discuss is that it contains microbeads. There has been great controversy about products containing microbeads because they are negatively effecting our environment. Microbeads are tiny spherical particles that are made of plastic and are used in many products like: body scrub, facial washes, exfoliants, and some toothpastes. These items require water in order to rinse off the access product after use, which is then are washed down the drain and entering the water systems. Since the microbeads are so small it is difficult for them to be caught by wastewater facilities that treat the water. This is a major problem because the microbeads will eventually appear in river, lakes, and oceans. Fish often mistake these tiny particles for other things and consume them. These fish then become toxic and are consumed by humans and other animals. This creates a cycle of unhealthy and harmful effects not only to the environment, but many living organisms.

You’ve reached the end of the products functional life, once there is no product left. You then are left with the plastic tube that it comes in. Neutrogena’s Oil- Free Acne Wash Pink Grapefruit Foaming Scrub is packaged in plastic tube, which itself contains many chemicals that are harmful to the environment. They also are not recycle friendly and are unable to break down completely turning into microplastics, which animals can choke on. In order to reduce these negative impacts that these products cause companies need to eliminate the use of the microbeads! They should also consider using containers that are eco-friendly and recyclable instead of plastics that contain chemicals. However, due to the great amount of controversy the United States enacted a ban on the use of microbeads in products. Johnson & Johnson already began to phase out microbeads in their products, which means as did Neutrogena since they are a brand of Johnson & Johnson. As of right now if you were to go to Neutrogena’s website you will see that this product no longer contains microbeads, however there are other companies like Amazon and eBay where you are still able to purchase it with microbeads. Another desirable goal would be to discard the products out there that still contain microbeads and make them unavailable for purchase.

https://www.sciencealert.com/microbeads-are-causing-the-fish-we-eat-to-become-toxic-study-finds

 

 

No Children Because of Climate Change? Some People Are Considering It.

Posted on by
Reply

The news report I presented in class called “No Children Because of Climate Change? Some People Are Considering It” by Maggie Astor summarized different thoughts on people having children in the age of the Anthropocene. It included thoughts from Mormons (who are at odds to reproduce with their religious traditions), a woman from Ohio (who after an unplanned pregnancy decided to have a second child so her first child would not be alone while climate change takes place), and a couple who plan to adopt instead of have children. One bias to point out is that the New York Times only used one study and did not offer any others to compare to.  The articles audience was anyone and everyone who is concerned with having children in the 21st century. What it did was detail that reproduction rates have slowed due to awareness about the effect overpopulation has on climate change. The article was presented and pertaining to our current time that affects all people from all around the globe since climate change is a systemic issue. It important everyone reads and becomes increasingly aware the footprint humans leave and how it creates global planetary changes. Slowed reproduction is happening because people are becoming increasingly self-aware of their decisions, especially those who have seen climate change happen in their lifetime. The impact of this finding shows that people are concerned with how population growth is contributing to degradation of the climate, land, sea, and resources. It is relevant to society because will require planning of labor force and this will raise questions about how we should be dealing with climate change (especially among younger generations). This article shares a close relation with environmental and sustainable studies, especially since the study in the article was conducted by Conceivable Future (a nonprofit founded on the Notion that “the climate crisis is a reproductive crisis) who also was the study cited in the NPR article we read for class. This topic is undoubtedly interwoven into the idea that religion, philosophy and science play an integral part in our world view. This article is also closely related with our discussions on our ecological footprint since it details our awareness of our impact as well as the discussions of the Anthropocene. In class, Professor Beckingham used an image that I’ve linked below which shows the lessened impact of carbon emissions if one less child Is born. Overall this article was further informative about overpopulation and is a great resource if students want to educate themselves further on this topic and the opinions that are held by those who are of child-rearing age. Some questions I wanted to propose for discussion was How much of slowed reproduction is due to awareness of overpopulation? And, Is it possible to keep having children at a sustained rate and instead alleviate other issues that contribute to global planetary change? Once we better understand humans and their worldview, we can further understand how these worldview influence decisions and in turn, the impacts.

 

 

Astor, M. (2018, February 5) No Children Because of Climate Change? Some People Are Considering It. New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/05/climate/climate-change-children.html

Personal Change

Posted on by
2

Blog two: Personal Change

                There are probably many things I could change in my day to day life to live more sustainably. The short amount of time I’ve been in this environmental class, I can’t help but notice the different things I do in routine everyday that has a negative impact on the environment around me. One main thing that sticks out to me is the way I waste water. A good description of this is not being “water wise.” I found this saying in an article I read on how much water we waste daily. The article I came across made me feel better and worse. I was able to see that I’m not alone when it comes to wasting water, but also seeing how much damage it can do in the long run. The main way I waste water is my showering technique. In the dorms sometimes, it takes a minute for the water to get warm. I will let the water run while I am doing other things, like straightening up my room. I usually don’t let it run that long, but it takes around 5 minutes for the water to get to bearable temperature. I never really thought of the amount of wasted water that is until thinking from a sustainable standpoint. This water is being wasted and running back to the water treatment facility or the sewage. Compared to other countries in the world we have one of the best access to clean water, and for me to literally let it go down the drain is not very considerate on my part. Another way I am not “water wise” is throwing away bottles of water that still have water in them. This can also be bad because I don’t recycle the water bottles when I do throw them away. That’s another personal change I could make. When I drink the water out of the bottle I never finish all of it and it ends up sitting on my dresser. When I am thirsty again I want a cold bottle out of the fridge. This repetitive cycle ends up with me having about 5 bottles sitting around with room temperature water that I don’t want to drink. I usually end up throwing these bottles in the trash with the water still in them. I really take water for granted when I think about it. For both scenarios, there are other options that I can utilize. With the shower water, I can try to not run the water for so long. This is easier said than done.  With the bottles, I can be more resourceful and put the unfinished water bottles in the fridge right when I am done with them. Also, I can recycle the bottles! This change should not be that hard and should positively impact my life and the environment. I should be able to keep up this life style being that I am really the only one who controls this. I will be able to limit the amount of wasted water, which might not be a huge difference when we are speaking worldwide but every part counts.

Alexis Waters-Peterson